No matter how hard I try, I fail to get why polygamy is still legal for Muslims in India. If bigamy is a criminal offence under the IPC, allowing Muslims to continue to do so is NOT affirmative action but DISCRIMINATION.

Laws are laws. Some sections of society might enjoy certain benefits but to waive off an offense under the IPC is discriminatory. If tomorrow I claim that piracy(electronic) is legal under the tenants of Pastafarianism, would they waive off my sentence if I were to be convicted?
I'm really contemplating converting my religion to 'Pastafarianism' legally and trying this out.

The second thing I don't get is why ONLY Muslims? Polygamy is also religiously sanctioned in Mormonism. Why doesn't any Mormon file a PIL against the Union of India and get this repealed?

(29-Apr-2012, 07:52 PM)TheTruth Wrote: No matter how hard I try, I fail to get why polygamy is still legal for Muslims in India. If bigamy is a criminal offence under the IPC, allowing Muslims to continue to do so is NOT affirmative action but DISCRIMINATION.

Laws are laws. Some sections of society might enjoy certain benefits but to waive off an offense under the IPC is discriminatory. If tomorrow I claim that piracy(electronic) is legal under the tenants of Pastafarianism, would they waive off my sentence if I were to be convicted?
I'm really contemplating converting my religion to 'Pastafarianism' legally and trying this out.

The second thing I don't get is why ONLY Muslims? Polygamy is also religiously sanctioned in Mormonism. Why doesn't any Mormon file a PIL against the Union of India and get this repealed?

Why is India so afraid of religion?

The muslim personal law is not a part of affirmative action. Nor that is discrimination. We must choose the words correctly because of the wider meaning associated with it. The Constitution of India supports the personal law to be governed by religion by its own, and Sharia allows polygamy hence it is allowed to Muslims. I accept your notion that it shouldn't be allowed and the law must be same irrespective of religion. However, I failed to understand why it is Discrimination against Males from other religion? Means you are suggesting that law must allow Polygamy for all? And bigamy is offence only if one of the wife complains about it.

And it is not ONLY for MUSLIMS, personal laws are seperate for Christians and Parsis also.
I support the idea of common personal laws, which give the fair rights and opportunity to all. However you must not highlight only Muslims while doing so. And BTW, the personal laws for HINDUS are based on Hindu texts from Dramashstra and other antient texts. Hence for Hindu also, personal laws are based on religion.

The personal law is not so simple in Indian context. If you remember, Hindu code bill was opposed strongly. I guess the volatality of the conmmunal situation at the time of indepence of India as responsible factor when these laws were codified. The fear that Muslim will be alienated from the independent "one India" could be one of the factor to do so.

Apart from personal law, every other laws are codified under common law. For example, in your piracy case, the law of piracy will prevail, and it will not see the religion of offender. Even if your religious text say otherwise, you will be treated under the law of piracy only. You must know the context of the law before giving examples.

As per today, everyone else who is not Christian, Muslim are covered with hindu marraige law. Hence even if you are mormon you are still governed by Hindu marraige law if you choose to.

Indians today are governed by two different ideologies. Their political ideal set in the preamble of the Constitution affirms a life of liberty, equality and fraternity. Their social ideal embodied in their religion denies them. - Ambedkar

(30-Apr-2012, 02:35 PM)nispat Wrote: However, I failed to understand why it is Discrimination against Males from other religion? Means you are suggesting that law must allow Polygamy for all?

Partly, yes. What I am suggesting is one of 3 outcomes:

1) Polygamy is legal for all
2) Polygamy is illegal for all
3) Polygamy is legal for those religions which sanction it

In my opinion, the third option would be viable.

(30-Apr-2012, 02:35 PM)nispat Wrote: And bigamy is offence only if one of the wife complains about it.

That, is untrue. If your wife was in coma and the husband(non-muslim) marries another woman, he would be charged with bigamy irrespective of the complaint not being lodged by the wife herself.

(30-Apr-2012, 02:35 PM)nispat Wrote: However you must not highlight only Muslims while doing so. And BTW, the personal laws for HINDUS are based on Hindu texts from Dramashstra and other antient texts. Hence for Hindu also, personal laws are based on religion.

I am aware of the existence of different personal laws. What I'm against is the sanction for polygamy only for Muslims. Polygamy is sanctioned for Mormons by their religion as well.

So why are ONLY muslims allowed to have multiple wives when the same rule can be applied to mormons? The only alternative a mormon polygamist would have would be to convert to Islam which would mean he ceases to be a mormon.

If the government feels that it should not interfere in personal laws and hence ensures that they are derived from respective scriptures, this should apply to ALL religions.

Your argument against my piracy example is a valid argument and I stand corrected.
What we disagree on is the case for mormons.

(30-Apr-2012, 02:35 PM)nispat Wrote: Hence even if you are mormon you are still governed by Hindu marraige law

Seems awfully unfair to Mormons. If Muslim personal law allows polygamy, every religion that permits polygamy deserves the same right.

What should be legal is for any number more than 1 of consenting people be allowed to join in a common marriage; whether it be 2, 3, 4, 5 or more people; whether they are of differing or same sex or of any ratio of women to men.

What should be important is that they want to join the marriage and that if later they want to leave the marriage they have a right to divorce, just as they had a right to marry.

What should not be allowed is any forced marriage, whether it is a monogamous or polygamous marriage. Too often someone will use the excuse of religion or social custom to force someone into a marriage they don't want to be in or force them to stay in a marriage they don't want to be in. That removes free will over a choice that should belong to the individual. Society, religion or governments should not be dictating who people can marry or divorce, it should be a matter of free will; that is, if we live in a free society and not a dictatorship.

Now, I personally, am in a long term heterosexual monogamous marriage for 17 years and expect that marriage to last for life. I think such a path is a good path to choose for many reasons. But, if 2 or more other people wish to follow a different path and are doing so of their own free will and they are not harming anyone, then that is their right.

Personally, I think anyone who can manage to have multiple spouses living under the same roof and getting along must be having a very good relationship, because getting more than two people living under the same roof and not fighting all the time seems to be a rare and difficult thing to achieve.